briandh

Maybe I haven't visited the right ones, but none of the 7-Eleven (or FamilyMart, Lawson, OKmart, or CU) stores I visited in South Korea, Taiwan, or Japan had selections that close to those of the Dollar General stores I've patronized. In my subjective judgement, the difference is pretty big. This is not a knock on them, of course, just difference in business model, and as you say, regional/market context.

Dollar General has a much larger selection than an Asian 7-Eleven. It has "real groceries" (albeit a small selection) and many non-food goods like detergent, toys, shampoo, even cell phones and a small variety of clothing. It's kind of like they got a list of the top 10% best-selling items at Wal-Mart and made a store out of it.

Dollar Tree (and Family Dollar IIRC) are a bit different because unlike Dollar General each item is actually a dollar. They're a bit more akin to Daiso, if you visited any of those in Thailand, though again with a bit more food (though less than Dollar General, and in smaller packages).

The average is weighted by GDP (another reason it is important to examine the rankings).

They only had a simple majority in the Senate.

Not quite, looking at the slides.

It finishes up with two slides of "tough lessons" basically explaining why it failed as a phone OS, and then "what's next?" containing connected device plans. So it's pretty well in line with the announcement.

> It's not an unreasonable position for a municipality to chose lose money on a stadium. They typically lose money on symphony orchestras, ballets and performing arts centers. That one is considered low culture and the other considered high culture is not relevant is we assume that the people are being ably represented.

This rests on the premise that is is reasonable for taxpayer money to fund any cultural activities at all, "high" or "low".

In any case, even accepting this premise, the difference is that the examples of "high" culture you cite are, unlike professional sports stadiums, generally not promoted on the basis of claims that they will contribute to the economic development of their communities; rather, they are generally promoted on the basis of unfalsifiable claims that they will have a positive cultural and educational impact.

> if you have a secure enough content security policy (and the browser in question supports it properly) it will be impossible for an attacker to execute their inserted Javascript

I don't follow your reasoning. Why wouldn't an MITM attacker modifying an HTTP response body to insert rogue Javascript also be able to modify the response headers to strip or alter the Content Security Policy?

The Tangled Web: A Guide to Securing Modern Web Applications is a good complement.

For instance, do you refer to a particular group of uninhabited islands as "Senkaku Islands, Japan", "Diaoyu Islands, People's Republic of China", or "Diaoyutai Islands, Republic of China"? Some people are very passionate about the answer.

Is the political entity on Formosa "Taiwan", "Taiwan Province, Republic of China", "Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China", or "Taiwan, Province of China"?

A quick look at their source suggests that they are using something called BLOX CMS, and their nameservers are run by TownNews, which is apparently the company behind BLOX.

BLOX is advertised as "Cloud-based" with "No hardware or software to install & maintain".

This all suggests that they actually cannot make such a change, by virtue of using an SaaS solution they have no control over.